I know this has been discussed at length but it will never sit easy with me that police officers should be judged for things they say off duty. And that judgement should include dismissal. The sending of grossly offensive messages is also problematic for me. The law might have a purpose if the crime is made out only if the recipient finds the message grossly offensive. But where is the harm if neither sender nor recipient is offended? Should all messages sent by a public communication network be made fully public and so open to scrutiny and censor? Let's judge a man by his actions as they say more about the measure of him. Is it misogyny that I refer to man instead of man and woman?

I think your ok with the misogyny, but sadly display the unconscious bias of the patriarchy :)

If you went through all white heterosexual male phones in the MPS, I'd say you would find at least one remark a woke panel would find offensive. If this is the standard, at least 50% of the MPS would have to be dismissed. It's what you get when you have a lot of males grouped together. Just ask any TSG patrol van. One reason I left. You would have to look over your shoulder before you said anything in the Nick to prevent a complaint.

I have just read the full report and it is full of disgusting comments by these officers who should be no where near policing or communities with views like this . Some of the what’s app messages were made when they were on duty so they should absolutely be sacked , imprisoned or disciplined and be no where near policing. Their comments do not belong to modern day policing.

Have you even read the report? Minor point but some of them were said on duty too.. and they're chatting about how they handled things ON duty. It's full of vile, disgusting messages, not jokes. Why do you think sending such content isn't an 'action' to 'judge a man' on? Ultimately we are meant to show a higher degree of professionalism because of what we do. How can I/ or others be seen as integral in my role if behind closed doors i'm degrading the very people I am meant to serve. Of course it raises questions as to whether someone can do the job. All of you who debate this concern around messages and the subjectivity of what is offensive/banter don't seem to properly grasp that it casts massive doubt as to whether they can or should perform in a public role that gives you powers/rights above the public and having control of the very things they joke about. Imagine reporting a rape to an officer and finding out this is how they chat about it? Also if you read more about the case you would see that none of these officers showed an ounce of remorse or horror that they exchanged 'dark' comments with an officer that went on to kidnap rape and murder. Instead they feel prejudiced against because Couzens was in the chat. I'd live with guilt for the rest of my life, yet none of them seem to be that bothered, just caught up in your little argument that their privacy should be protected. Pointless to say all this anyway to someone who sets their name as Mike Hunt.

Accepting that one's thoughts are precisely that and control of another's thoughts is abhorrent to anyone except those who are total control freaks, it is the case however that it is deeply concerning in what is meant to be a disciplined organisation when officers lack the commonsense, intelligence, self respect and discipline to keep their 'iffy' thoughts solely to themselves, but here we are circa 2022 when ALL ranks use, sometimes misuse social media, speaks volumes perhaps of the failings of modern day recruitment processes.

Four issues here folks 1. At training school we were told it was ok to have human ‘prejudices’ so long as you were professional enough to recognise them and not ‘discriminate’- does that not apply to private messages / discussions? 2. Was anything said (in these private groups to fully consenting grown adults with same humour tastes) anything you can’t pay to see at a public stand up comedy or on mainstream (never mind streaming services such as Netflix etc) such as channel 4 or even bbc1’s Franky Boyle or jimmy carr et al? 3. Walk into any a&e dept in the country and there you will see predominantly women - more than 90% female nurses with utterly wicked sense of humours and deep discussions of dark humour about multitudes of their patients they see every day. This is how they deal with the daily trauma and this is what cops all used to do long before the daily headlines we see of serious MH issues and suicides we see. If poking ‘private’ humour at my lovers one’s trauma or death means they shields themselves from vicarious trauma arising I couldn’t care less so long as they were polite and professional in their contact dealing etc. 4. Does the police report to the nhs if they see in ‘appropriate’ to the Nhs or other professions or are they only concerned with self conduct? Or is this an issue of creating misconduct internally only from what have been mostly exerting criminal powers of seizure and review of officers phones? Do these same rules apply to MP’s and cps and judges too?

Four issues here folks 1. At training school we were told it was ok to have human ‘prejudices’ so long as you were professional enough to recognise them and not ‘discriminate’- does that not apply to private messages / discussions? 2. Was anything said (in these private groups to fully consenting grown adults with same humour tastes) anything you can’t pay to see at a public stand up comedy or on mainstream (never mind streaming services such as Netflix etc) such as channel 4 or even bbc1’s Franky Boyle or jimmy carr et al? 3. Walk into any a&e dept in the country and there you will see predominantly women - more than 90% female nurses with utterly wicked sense of humours and deep discussions of dark humour about multitudes of their patients they see every day. This is how they deal with the daily trauma and this is what cops all used to do long before the daily headlines we see of serious MH issues and suicides we see. If poking ‘private’ humour at my lovers one’s trauma or death means they shields themselves from vicarious trauma arising I couldn’t care less so long as they were polite and professional in their contact dealing etc. 4. Does the police report to the nhs if they see in ‘appropriate’ to the Nhs or other professions or are they only concerned with self conduct? Or is this an issue of creating misconduct internally only from what have been mostly exerting criminal powers of seizure and review of officers phones? Do these same rules apply to MP’s and cps and judges too?

Might upset those of a more gentle persuasion but back in the day before social media reared its ugly head and turned everyone into some kind of brain dead zombie People in certain professions had and still do have a very dark sense of humour. This would horrify people who overheard some of the stuff discussed over a curry after a set of nights but it was a safety valve. The pressure of the week was released and everyone went home safe and sound. Not saying it was ever politically correct but it was bloody funny. But none of it was put on your phone, none of it was shared with people who had not walked in our boots and seen the stuff we had seen and dealt with. Now because of social media the fools put this stuff on the phone and think the WhatsApp is a safe place. It is not because it only takes an incident like the murdering sexual deviant Couzons to get his phone snatched and then every single comment is out there for the "we will not tolerate" brigade to pour over and destroy you.

Agree completely - bunch of Neanderthals.